GavStar

7 hours ago, Ruud said:

For me, astronomical observing is seeing original photons with my own eyes.

Eeva is watching an image. That's fine, I like that too, but it's not observing. It's seeing photons that travelled mere centimetres. It's not the real thing.

I would love to show you the views through a white phosphor NV monocular attached to, say, a 4 inch refractor. It sure feels like the real thing to me. ?

30 minutes ago, SIDO said:

Its just a highly advanced piece of military technology powered by electricity with circuts to control power used and for photon emitting and collection, just a glass objective lens is quite an understatement ?

Yes there is some sophisticated technology within the NV monocular ?.

What matters to me are the end results and the ‘feeling’ in use of being just like an eyepiece. I guess that was what I was trying to convey (not very well ?)

1 hour ago, Buzzard75 said:

That's how I've come to understand it myself. I've also always assumed that NV fell into the EEA category as there is a screen and electronics involved. I just don't see the differentiation between it and video astronomy.

I think one issue in this discussion is that there are so few people (particularly in the U.K.) that have actually looked through a top quality white phosphor manual gain NV eyepiece (and it is an eyepiece!). 

Those that have looked through one are stunned at how similar the experience is to a standard glass eyepiece (apart from you can see so much more). There are no wires, no computer screens, just a glass lens with plenty of eye relief to look through. The stars, nebulae, galaxies etc are white in colour, very sharp and very natural looking. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, when I took mine to a London astro meet a couple of months ago, no one suspected it was anything other than a normal glass eyepiece until they were told. The actual experience with NV is virtually identical to just using an eyepiece. 

It is very different to video astronomy.

17 minutes ago, Grant said:

I'm still not clear Gav - it sounds like this IS an idealogical issue and no matter how many NVers you would still want, on principle to post in the observing section?

I disagree with the argument that others wouldn't have discovered you if the posts were in a different section - usage stats of the forum don't support that people use the forum in that way, only looking at specific sections. That same argument could also be used for any other new technique or method in astronomy and we essentially get to the argument where we shouldn't separate observing and imaging or video astronomy etc.. etc.. as otherwise people might not find those posts either - it's simply not the case.

I would actually argue the opposite, having a clearly marked NV forum where all NV posts are together could help somebody who comes across it or finds it through googling 'night vision and astronomy'. Having all those posts in one place with equipment information and observational reports with NV kit would be really useful. As it stands this information is spread everywhere and there is no single place to go and find it - one could argue, perhaps that's why there are only 4 of you currently?

There is also another point here, there are plenty of visual observers, using the observing section that don't want to see NV posts in there and don't agree they are the same thing or even close. The recent decision to request that NV posts clearly state in the topic title that they concern NV reinforces this.

 

Ok I guess we are just not going to reach agreement on this point. All the NV users are saying quite clearly that they would like to post on the main topic boards. If we label the posts clearly as NV, other posters can ignore it if they wish. I have reflected a good deal on this topic and hope I have expressed my opinion clearly and politely.

But at the end of the day it’s up to you to decide. 

42 minutes ago, Grant said:

The argument in all of this that resonates with me is the timing issue - have we made this change  before there is enough NVers to warrant their own section?

My concern though is will the NVers EVER want to have their own section or is this an idealogical issue whereby you will always want to be part of the purely visual observing sections regardless of how many NVers there are posting?

Ok, good questions. ?

I think it’s very likely that NV astronomy is going to remain being very rare in the UK (it’s very rare in the US and it’s far cheaper and easier to get there!). So I think consideration of a separate SGL NV forum is not appropriate for many years due to so few users...

On the idealogical issue, I have two observations: firstly my NV eyepiece sits along side my glass eyepieces since for all practical purposes they operate and feel like the same thing to me. This points me towards wanting to post about both types of observing in the normal observing sections. Second point, which sorry I have mentioned a few times already, both Alan and Mark would not have found out about NV if I had only have posted about NV in the EAa section. NV is so niche that the reality is for most people you just accidentally bump into it somehow and I really believe SGL should try to maximise the chances of this by allowing NV posts in standard sections. I was lucky, someone in my local astro club had a NV monocular already - most people won’t have that opportunity...

12 hours ago, Steve said:

Nobody was banned from posting in the general observing forums ? 

Individual discussion boards help people find and share information with like-minded people on topics that interest them. They are not rigid enclosures. They are quite open because discussions and interests often overlap. 

HTH

Please could @Steve or @Grant clarify this comment? Does this mean that posts about night vision are still fine in the general observing and equipment sections (suitably labelled)? Or does this mean that nv users can post on the general sections but only on sessions where only standard glass eyepieces are used?

28 minutes ago, John said:

But NV is EAA isn't it ?

It involves electricity, provides an assist and, here, is used for astronomy.

It seems to me to be like racing push bikes vs powered bikes - both go around a track but the powered ones will have much faster lap times so the two forms can't be directly compared in terms of results.

 

From a purist definition, yes. But from a practical, in use, perspective, no - it’s completely different. (And from a practical ‘how it feels’ perspective NV is very very similar to viewing through normal glass eyepieces. This was shown very clearly by my recent outreach experience in Regent’s Park - the people looking through the NV eyepiece had no idea it wasn’t just a normal glass eyepiece!)

1 hour ago, R26 oldtimer said:

Found that thread and read most of it. Seems there is a purist attitude from some visual observers towards NV. But when you guys express the same purist attitude towards the rest of the eaa observators, you just make the visual purist's point even more valid.

I don’t understand the point you are making.

@Highburymarkhas eloquently expressed the concerns that us (only 4) night vision (NV) users have, ie

1) half of us would never have heard of NV if it had only been discussed in the EAA/ video astronomy section, so would have missed out on getting this additional eyepiece tool in the box. Allowing night vision discussion in the main observing/equipment sections allows better communication for people who may be interested (but don’t know it yet ?)

2) there’s only 4 of us so nowhere near enough to have a separate section 

3) NV is a very different approach from a practical perspective to EAa/video astronomy. There is very little overlap in terms of what each type can learn/discuss with the other. This is clearly shown on cloudynights where NV and EAa are grouped in the same section and there is no discussion between the two groups so it may as well be two different sections. (However CN is very happy for NV posts to be made in the general observing or equipment sections if we wish). 

5 minutes ago, Lockie said:

Thanks Steve, taking every aspect into account including transportation, mounting, imaging and observations of various objects, they are the best compromise I can think of  

I do really like my 100mm f7.4 doublet. But as an airline travel scope I prefer my 95mm f5.9 Triplet which is much easier for carry on, virtually the same aperture so good for planetary and has a nice wide field.

23 minutes ago, Grant said:

This change isn’t just about NV it’s about ‘electronically enhanced visual astronomy’. NV is just part of that.

We will not be making any changes until we see from the stats and activity levels over the next six months or so what difference these changes make.

As this section grows we will look to divide it out further but at present NV doesn’t have enough content to justify its own section.

 

We don’t want NV to have a separate section, just to be able to post in the ‘standard’ visual and equipment sections (with suitable title labelling as was agreed by the mods only a couple of weeks ago!). Are we ok to still do this?

We believe what we do is much more like (in terms of experience rather than technology) normal glass observing than EAA. 

15 minutes ago, Highburymark said:

I think the Cloudy Nights NV/EAA forum has thrived because there are enough devotees to reach some form of critical mass. As night vision astronomy is only just starting in the UK (indeed, every known user in the country has already contributed to this thread!), I can't see how it's going to attract enough traffic to support conversations. 

Excellent point @Highburymark.

3 NV observers on SGL have now commented that this change would be to the detriment of NV discussion on SGL (and @PeterW was very diplomatic ?). I really think SGL admin should reconsider. 

I have to admit I’m very disappointed with this development. I’m a visual observer not a EEVA observer. 

I hope my NV posts over the past 15 months have always been very clear about the equipment I’ve been using. I also hope that they brought this new approach a far greater audience by having the posts in the normal observing sections. I think having a separate EEVA section ‘hides’ away these new techniques and makes it more difficult for general users to find out about them.

As you say, there has been a fair bit of discussion and conflict. It’s a shame that as a group we can’t embrace new approaches and change. It does make me feel unwelcome on SGL. 

I don’t think I will be posting much on SGL in the future as a result. ?

51 minutes ago, Highburymark said:

No need for sympathy Piero! I'm holding onto a very nice collection of eyepieces - and had too many anyway. I'm going for a Tak Epsilon 130d - Gavin's found it excellent for night vision.

A 55mm plossl, 40mm plossl, 27mm panoptic and 4mm delite - what more could you want/need?? ??

Another thumbs up for the adm clamp upgrade ?

30 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

There is of course an easy solution to your mismatch problem! Sell everything and buy the entire set of XW's. 

Where’s the 30mm and 40mm (and 14mm but that’s the dodgy one), Mike? ?

On topic, I have some Pentax XW (3.5, 5, 7, 10, 20 and 30) and Delos (4.5, 6, and 8 ) and they are both equivalent in view quality and comfort (ie excellent). I also have the 3 and 4 delite (don’t want to miss any gaps ?) and have been very impressed with these as well.

Looks very nice - mine is still negotiating uk customs!

@alanjgreen have you got a safety screw on your Borg dovetail bar?

Just got my Panther Mount sorted for 3 scope setup...looking forward to giving these a go together

I’ve had my az gti mount for 18 months and it’s worked great. However in the past month the synscan WiFi stopped being shown (just got the esp one which doesn’t work). Since I normally use the handset controller I wasn’t in a rush to sort it out but wanted to be able to use it for solar and for quick WiFi setup as well.

I got a WiFi dongle today and have managed to get the WiFi firmware downloader to run. So far I’ve reached 75%, 66%, 5%, 96% (!!!), 80%, 11% before the update failed. Hopefully it will eventually update but certainly I’d suggest if your az gti Mount is working fine then I’d not bother with a firmware update. It’s a frustrating process to say the least ?

Update: just completed the update after about the 10th attempt - hurrah! Just tried the mount and I have my WiFi and solar tracking back - success!!

1 hour ago, StaceStar said:

Primaluce airy 72, flattener, scope rings , 60mm guidescope with rings, vixen bar, psu for eagle ?

It looks very nice. I think you also have an Altair edf 72mm which seems very similar to the Primaluce (apart from the primaluce has fpl51 glass compared to the fpl53 of the Altair)

I also own the Altair 72mm so wondered what the Primaluce advantages are compared to the Altair?

5 minutes ago, Littleguy80 said:

I have an Astronomik UHC filter which is excellent. However, I find myself considering giving a DGM NBP filter a go based on the number of positive comments I've seen on this filter. People seem to most commonly reference the views of M42 with it. I'd be interested if anyone has ever tried these filters side by side? Any thoughts or experiences appreciated  

Yes I have. Much preferred the Astronomik uhc. The DGM had a red double star effect I really didn’t like. Further comments in this thread 

25 minutes ago, jetstream said:

I like the 17mm Nikon HW better than my 17mm Ethos- I feel it offers a step up in contrast and it appears to be "sharper". The contrast using the 14mm EIC is giving the Docter a rival and on the core of M42 in the 15" f4.8 the views are jaw dropping. I need to test the 17 Nikon for pincushion distortion, something that bothers me a bit.

The Nikon HW needs a better eyeguard, which the 17E grudgingly supplied (fits perfect).

My testing is on hold with the TSA120 as it is -36c this morning.

Gerry, I can’t even imagine what -36c feels like ❄️ ❄️ ❄️ 

9 minutes ago, nicoscy said:

Well, postman didn’t drop it off exactly - I picked it up from DHL offices

 

Lovely Nicos! Your initial thoughts??

14 hours ago, alanjgreen said:

A two inch Chroma 5nm Ha filter has arrived, just in time for Christmas.

Look forward to see how it goes when paired with my PVS-14 Night Vision on those fainter Sharpless catalog objects...

Alan

I’ll be interested to hear what you think of this filter with the Photonis tube, Alan. It certainly makes a contrast difference with my Harder tube, but I rarely use my Photonis now. And also the impact it has at your dark skies rather than my light polluted ones?

1 hour ago, Tubby Bear said:

An unrelated question from the image looking at the optic if i may Gavin......

What i think is the end of the focuser drawtube appears to be bare metal.

ie not painted. Would that possibly be an issue causing unwanted reflections and scatter

when look ing at bright objects.....??

Its probably not an issue at all and just me worrying unnecessarily.

No bare metal - the end tube is painted black like the rest. It was just a lighter colour in the image from the camera flash due to the angle of the picture.

And from observing the moon on the first light definitely no reflections etc ??

1 hour ago, Tubby Bear said:

 

and imagined the idea of taking a scope away (on a plane) with similar weights.

Although the 8kg mass felt manageable, i don't think i'd be too keen lugging it around for too long.

The 4kg option felt so much easier.

I think this hits the nail in terms of what I really like about the Baader - as an aeroplane portable scope it’s virtually unbeatable imo (although the tv85 is pretty good as well). The 95mm aperture gives enough for good planetary observing and the f5.9 ratio makes its a) compact for fitting into various different types of aeroplane bags such as my think tank airport accelerator b) great for widefield scanning of the skies. I’m a bit of a wuss and just didn’t like the idea of taking the focuser and dew shield off of my Tak fc100df but I know several SGLers are fine with this. I’m guessing the views between the Tak and the Baader will be quite similar - i will do a side by side sometime...

I’m hoping to take the Baader to the Southern Hemisphere next summer.